
by West Vandengaarde » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:32 pm

by United Counties of Escanaba » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:38 pm

by West Vandengaarde » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:40 pm
United Counties of Escanaba wrote:What is this thing with Minnesota? Why don't we ask if New Jersey can survive? It has about as much interest as a thread.


by Avenio » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:41 pm

by Ajaria » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:43 pm

by Urcea » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:43 pm

by Vousielle » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:43 pm

by West Vandengaarde » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:44 pm
Ajaria wrote:Wait, Canada is oddly scared of this new nation and decides not to embargo them because of this fear?
This situation seems really illogical, and one of the only Minnesota-Wanks I have ever seen.
Still, it probably wouldn't. America's embargo means some sort of animosity exists between the US and the new country, and with Canada's fear, it would probably take whatever chance it has to get rid of this new state.
-Parhe

by The Murtunian Tribes » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:45 pm
Avenio wrote:Probably not, by my understanding of things. They'd be, for all practical purposes, an economic vassal of Canada and the US, since it would be, for all intents and purposes, landlocked and subject to whatever economic tariffs or other restrictions they put on them. It would be either a case of sovereignty-by-association (ie they'd be attached by the hip to the US) or a depressed little backwater.

by I-gloo » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:45 pm

by Episarta » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:45 pm
by Radiatia » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:46 pm

by West Vandengaarde » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:46 pm
The Murtunian Tribes wrote:Avenio wrote:Probably not, by my understanding of things. They'd be, for all practical purposes, an economic vassal of Canada and the US, since it would be, for all intents and purposes, landlocked and subject to whatever economic tariffs or other restrictions they put on them. It would be either a case of sovereignty-by-association (ie they'd be attached by the hip to the US) or a depressed little backwater.
Pretty much. They have no viable ports that don't go through both Canadian and U.S. waters.

by West Vandengaarde » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:46 pm
Episarta wrote:Maybe? If Canada would like us. It's an interesting idea, I guess. And seeing as how I live in North Dakota, it would affect me. But mining and oil in western North Dakota and the Black Hills of South Dakota could provide some nice raw material for major manufacturing centres in Minnesota. And North Dakota would probably take over a majority of the agriculture with some help from South Dakota. Not too big of a population. It would be around 2.5 million in all, right? It might work, but you never know with these sort of things.

by The Murtunian Tribes » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:48 pm
West Vandengaarde wrote:The Murtunian Tribes wrote:Pretty much. They have no viable ports that don't go through both Canadian and U.S. waters.
That's why I say the best bet would be to be somewhat self-sufficient. But that would require either a massive population shift to increase agricultural production in the Dakotas or immigration from somewhere for the necessary unskilled labor.

by Austria Prussia » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:49 pm

by Ajaria » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:49 pm
The Murtunian Tribes wrote:West Vandengaarde wrote:That's why I say the best bet would be to be somewhat self-sufficient. But that would require either a massive population shift to increase agricultural production in the Dakotas or immigration from somewhere for the necessary unskilled labor.
Self-sufficient? Don't make me laugh. Americans don't know the meaning of the word. There is no way they could produce enough by themselves to support anything REMOTELY close to their current standard of living without trade.

by West Vandengaarde » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:50 pm
The Murtunian Tribes wrote:West Vandengaarde wrote:That's why I say the best bet would be to be somewhat self-sufficient. But that would require either a massive population shift to increase agricultural production in the Dakotas or immigration from somewhere for the necessary unskilled labor.
Self-sufficient? Don't make me laugh. Americans don't know the meaning of the word. There is no way they could produce enough by themselves to support anything REMOTELY close to their current standard of living without trade.

by Episarta » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:50 pm
West Vandengaarde wrote:Episarta wrote:Maybe? If Canada would like us. It's an interesting idea, I guess. And seeing as how I live in North Dakota, it would affect me. But mining and oil in western North Dakota and the Black Hills of South Dakota could provide some nice raw material for major manufacturing centres in Minnesota. And North Dakota would probably take over a majority of the agriculture with some help from South Dakota. Not too big of a population. It would be around 2.5 million in all, right? It might work, but you never know with these sort of things.
Minnesota's population is over 5 million, so it wouldn't be quite that small.

by Avenio » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:50 pm
West Vandengaarde wrote:That's why I say the best bet would be to be somewhat self-sufficient. But that would require either a massive population shift to increase agricultural production in the Dakotas or immigration from somewhere for the necessary unskilled labor.

by Ajaria » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:51 pm
Austria Prussia wrote:I don't think it could. Not to mention if the US Senate, House of Representatives and White House were all occupied by "radicals", all of the liberal states would be just as likely as Minnesota to leave in this scenario.

by I-gloo » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:52 pm

by West Vandengaarde » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:53 pm
Avenio wrote:West Vandengaarde wrote:That's why I say the best bet would be to be somewhat self-sufficient. But that would require either a massive population shift to increase agricultural production in the Dakotas or immigration from somewhere for the necessary unskilled labor.
So it would require an economic shift on Stalinist scales to work?

by Anglynova » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:53 pm

by The Murtunian Tribes » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:54 pm
Ajaria wrote:The Murtunian Tribes wrote:Self-sufficient? Don't make me laugh. Americans don't know the meaning of the word. There is no way they could produce enough by themselves to support anything REMOTELY close to their current standard of living without trade.
I am not aware of one present nation that can.
-Parhe
West Vandengaarde wrote:The Murtunian Tribes wrote:Self-sufficient? Don't make me laugh. Americans don't know the meaning of the word. There is no way they could produce enough by themselves to support anything REMOTELY close to their current standard of living without trade.
We could technically survive with just agriculture, really, and we grow a lot of vegetation, since we're one of the biggest agricultural states, especially for pork. We also have, as I said, companies like 3M for manufacturing needs. I realize it would be a rough transition, but it would be entirely possible with the right effort being put in to it.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Fartsniffage, Forsher, Hidenan, Kernen, Point Blob
Advertisement